Using their dominance in the legislature, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) on Tuesday forced the legislature's Procedure Committee to pass a draft amendment to Article 17 of the Referendum Law (
To protest the KMT and PFP legislators' attempt to expand the legislature's power, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) walked out of the committee meeting. Presidential Office officials said the draft would turn the "bird cage"referendum law into an "iron cage" law.
Proposed by KMT Legislator Kao Yu-jen (
The legislature has become a constitutional monster since the abolishment of the National Assembly. That is why the pan-green camp has moved several times to halve the number of legislative seats, yet the move has been blocked by pan-blue legislators.
With the KMT and the PFP trying to boost their power by placing all referendum powers in the hands of the legislature, they are openly trampling on Taiwan's democratic reform.
They claim they are proposing the amendment in order to highlight the illegality of President Chen Shui-bian's (
If, as the blue camp claims, Chen's defensive referendum really is a matter of campaign manipulation aimed at attracting votes by playing to voters' Taiwan awareness, then the blue camp's referendum plan is even more of an attempt at manipulation designed to win votes from Taipei and Keelung. The blue camp knows it is weak in southern Taiwan. Its leaders are therefore trying to establish a power base in northern Taiwan. They explain their campaign manipulation by saying that the integration referendum movement has been initiated by the public and thus is a legal referendum.
In view of the KMT's and the PFP's behavior, voters do not know what to say. Regardless, even the KMT-PFP alliance wants to launch a referendum. Although the referendum issues are different, and though they are proposed by different political camps, it shows that referendums have already become a constitutional mechanism widely accepted by both government and the opposition. This is a significant victory in the development of Taiwan's constitutional reform, and means that there is no turning back on the issue of referendums.
Regardless of whether voters support the integration of Taipei City, Taipei County, and Keelung City, we are pleased to see that the KMT and the PFP are proceeding with their plan in accordance with the Referendum Law. This newspaper's pro-referendum stance does not change as referendum initiators change.
Nevertheless, we have to alert readers and ask them to condemn the blue camp's hypocritical position on the referendum issue. On the one hand, they cook up charges against Chen's referendum. On the other hand, they plan to hold a referendum to attract votes. Let us hope readers can see through this.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS